S Ur Pr Is Ing R Us Si a 2 01 5
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SURPRISING RUSSIA 2015 SENTIMENTS OPINIONS VALUES UDK 316.3(470) BBK 60.59(2Ros) З76 The editorial board of the “Platform” Centre for Social Design includes: A. Firsov (Project Leader), N. Kolennikova, D. Lisitsyn, D. Seryogin and E. Shipova. Surprising Russia 2015. — Moscow: Eksmo, 2016 — 208 p. (Russia by the numbers.) ISBN - 978-5-9907855-1-9 The “Surprising Russia” annual edition compiled by Russia’s leading social re- search centre and think tanks aims to study current social trends. The book contains research data and presents the viewpoints of prominent Russian ex- perts. The series has been published since 2014. UDK 316.3(470) BBK 60.59(2Ros) © Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) © Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Research (ISEPR Foundation) © “Platform”, Centre for Social Design INTRODUCTION 3 INTRODUCTION RUSSIA’S TRANSFORMATION AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOCIAL SCIENCE VALERY FEDOROV, Director General, Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) he contemporary world is still characterized by the persistent belief that elab- Torate and tricky techniques allow sociologists to efectively map popular senti- ments, even if it is impossible to obtain exact measurements. To what extent is it rea- sonable for Russians to share his belief? Let us not forget that sociology as we know it today emerged and developed in Western Europe and Northern America. Non-Western societies, including Russia, are structured diferently, which was recognized as long ago as in the 1950s – 1960s along with the emergence of modernization theories. Te debate whether non-West- ern societies have fundamentally diferent central pillars or merely lag behind the Western civilization is far from over and is likely to stay just as intense for years to come. Tus such circumstances encourage us to just take it for granted that public opinion in Russia takes shape and operates diferently than in the US or Germany. It implies that apart from the Western peculiarities and stumbling blocks of its stud- ies we must take into account specifcally Russian features and complicating factors. Furthermore, one should take into consideration the history of Russian social studies. Soviet sociology’s development was deliberately impeded and crammed into an ill-ftting ideological mould. Yet when the country managed to throw of the shackles of the past, the pendulum swung the other way: Russian sociologists set to myopically apply Western conceptions to Russia’s reality. Incidentally, they still adhere to this approach. As a result, amid pluralism, we lack empirical research, which describes Russian society adequately, let alone fundamental research projects. What do opinion poll results that our colleagues and our research centre obtain reveal? Te answer should at least rest upon the analysis of the existing landscape 4 SURPRISING RUSSIA and the society. To conduct such a study, one must be aware of trends over several generations, rather than just a few decades. In this context, we are faced with another currently insurmountable obstacle. Our country started to conduct systematic opin- ion surveys only in 1989 and 1990. With the period too short and the changes too sweeping, it is virtually impossible to make good use of the frst opinion polls’ fnd- ings. Indeed, the nation, its sociopolitical make-up, as well as vocabulary and values have transformed profoundly. Nowadays Russia’s sociology has to fulfll quite a mod- est task: scholars need to constantly accumulate, store and reveal this data to reveal trends over time. Terefore, this work makes it more likely that the qualitative inter- pretation of the data will be given in the not-too-distant future. Meanwhile, sociologists have constructed a rather paradoxical picture of new so- cial norms and attitudes pervading our society. We are witnessing the steady rise in tolerance towards other religions, ethnic groups, beliefs and even sexual orien- tation. At the same time, new values and leanings remain mostly abstract whereas daily routines are visible and concrete. Te new ways have yet to be internalized, in other words, people need real motivation coming from within. Consider, for in- stance, the following case. We want to move like the wind on city speedways rather than get stuck in trafc jams. Yet when it comes to cutting down several trees to build them, we will vehemently oppose it (here we have the NIMBY-efect, that is “not in my backyard!”). It is related to our unwillingness to break certain habits for the sake of abstract common betterment or shared values, even if we voice our support for all these projects and convictions. Te transformation of the long-established way of life, customs, traditions and landscape represents a long and painful process in what we call democratic societies. It is true of the enforcement of new social norms which goes beyond simple decla- rations as well as construction processes and local attitudes to them. To reconcile newly articulated interests with conservative beliefs, one needs time, which, as they say, is a great healer, as well as values shared by elites, business circles and society. Additionally, this mechanism will need an efective method of harmonizing difer- ent interests. Broadly speaking, it is necessary to produce the culture of compromise and respect for the interests of “the other”, rather than “wage war to the bitter end”. If society is unable to foster the culture of consensus, democracy will not be achieved. Basically, democracy is a system of confict management. It does not cause rivalries. Rather, democracy is a product of disputes, as well as a civilized means of resolving all diferences. Te lack of overt conficts will hamper any democratic development. Democracy handles confict, thus legitimizing it. Under such circumstances, confict is not obviated instantaneously; conversely, its long-term settlement implies a step- INTRODUCTION 5 by-step approach. Opponents are not defeated or eliminated; they become at least competitors and at best partners. Te third edition of “Surprising Russia” demonstrates how the vivid image of Rus- sian society analyzed with various sociological instruments gets even more specifc and complete. Values, underlying principles, and individual leanings put together create a comprehensive picture, thus shedding light on such a complex, “hidden”, but still extremely interesting society. 6 SURPRISING RUSSIA PUBLIC OPINION AND EXECUTIVE DECISION-MAKING DMITRY BADOVSKIY, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Research (ISEPR Foundation), Civic Chamber member ublic opinion is a key factor for modern states in decision-making at the na- Ptional and international level. Public opinion is shaped by electoral competition alongside basic democratic principles, such as political representation and public interest. Meanwhile, the relations between Realpolitik and decision-making and public opinion are a two-way street. Political developments and processes afect constitu- encies; they bring about evolving public opinion and changing assessments of var- ious issues. State and political leaders turn to opinion polls on the regular basis. Te general public learn about the fndings ad-hoc mainly via mass media, with the informa- tion matching the pace and the ideas of the news feeds. Such data tends to be highly relevant and applicable but soon we lose their very track in the wild stream of in- formation. In other words, though opinion poll results concerning specifc events and cases appear regularly, the need for a systematic sociological analysis of a wide range of issues remains. It is this very comprehensive and accurate picture, underpinned by the relevant expert opinion that largely contributes to efective decision mak- ing in various spheres. Tis is relevant for politics as well as management in other realms, as well as for society at large as a tool for better self-analysis. Te annual edition of Surprising Russia aims to facilitate reaching these objec- tives. Tis review presents public opinion on the most burning issues, followed by comments of notable political scientists and analysts; sociologists and other ex- perts. INTRODUCTION 7 I believe that the book has the potential to become a manual for policymakers in everyday management and decision-making. It would help them as well as other readers to learn more about Russia and its society. Te Surprising Russia seeks to promote understanding. PART 1 FACE TO FACE WITH THE WEST WE AND THE WORLD: UKRAINE: FAMILY CONFLICT? COOPERATION RUSSIA’S PIVOT TO ASIA: WHAT ARE OUR EXPECTATIONS? AND CONFRONTATION MIDDLE EAST HOTSPOTS AUTHORITY OF THE STATE, ITS FOUNDATIONS AND ROLE IN SOCIETY HISTORICAL MEMORY AND STATE SYMBOLS CAN WE RELY ON THE STATE? CRIMEA IS OURS: WHEN THERE IS NO ROOM FOR QUESTIONS DEFENSE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT: ARMY AND POLICE DEFENDING OURSELVES. LIFE UNDER SANCTIONS. THE YEAR OF CRISIS: CRISIS: ADAPTATION STRATEGY STRESS-RESISTANCE TEST RUSSIA’S QUALITY OF LIFE FAMILY AND SOCIETY: TRADITION AND MODERNITY TRADITIONAL VALUES SACRED AND PROFANE: CHANGING BOUNDARIES AND EVERYDAY PREFERENCES HOW WE PERCEIVE “CULTURE” INFORMATION SOURCES: POPULARITY AND TRUST 10 SURPRISING RUSSIA FACE TO FACE WITH THE WEST ussia’s public sentiment towards the Western world has shifed from extremely Rfavourable to highly unfavourable since the 1990s. Initially, Russians stressed their readiness to deeply integrate with the West while nowadays they have become suspicious of collaborating with it and even experienced a feeling of alienation. Te year 2015 appeared to have reached its turning point. Twenty fve years ago the political awakening that followed the end of the Cold War substantially contributed to the development of relations. Te number of Rus- sians believing in America’s hostility achieved the margin of error. As far back as ten years ago more than 50% of Russian citizens were sure that the leading European countries were seeking to adopt a rapprochement policy. Yet all the euphoria started to fade afer the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. Te developments in Georgia, the Middle East and Ukraine caused disillusionment and mistrust, primarily, in terms of the US activities.